Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                

TM3135 PENILAIAN FORMASI - Pertemuan-2&3

Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 29

TM3135 – PENILAIAN FORMASI

MINGGU KE-3 (18 OKTOBER 2021)


INSTITUT TEKNOLOGI SAINS BANDUNG
FORMATION EVALUATION APPLICATION
 Estimating recoverable hydrocarbon (primary application)  recoverable hydrocarbon ?
 Estimating hydrocarbon in-place (primary application)  hydrocarbon in-place ?
 Rock typing  ?
 Abnormal pressure detection  ?
 Evaluationg rock stress  rock stress ?
 Locating reservoir fluid contacts  fluid contacts ?
 Fracture detection  fracture ?
 Identifying geologic environments
RECOVERABLE HYDROCARBON

 What are the parameters obtained from


Formation Evaluation?
CUT-OFF

 Cut-off Saturation : The ability of


the hydrocarbons to flow decreases
rapidly, or conversely, the ability of
water to flow increases rapidly
 Cut-off Porosity : is the minimum
porosity above which an
economically acceptable single
phase permeability is probavle.
UNCERTAINTY IN HYDROCARBON VOLUME ESTIMATION

1. Desired parameters must be


inferred from measurements
indirectly
UNCERTAINTY IN HYDROCARBON VOLUME ESTIMATION

2. Empirical relations of a
statistical nature must be used
UNCERTAINTY IN HYDROCARBON VOLUME ESTIMATION

Example of a statistical nature


 the plot of interval transit time, t, data from an
acoustic log and core porosities indicates two
trends .
 The trend for the nonanhydritic dolomite can be fit
reasonably well, but the anhydritic dolomites show
appreciable scatter around any average correlation
that could be used.
 Thus, any porosity evaluation in this section must
include a method to distinguish anhydritic dolomite
from nonanhydritic dolomite.
UNCERTAINTY IN HYDROCARBON VOLUME ESTIMATION

HOW TO SOLVE IT?


UNCERTAINTY IN HYDROCARBON VOLUME ESTIMATION

3. Economics must be considered


 Based on evaluation cost per-foot, cores
may cost 500 times more, and "mud logs"
may cost five times more, than wireline
logs. Productivity tests are usually quite
expensive, costing thousands of dollars per
test .
 Economically, it is desirable to design an
evaluation program using wireline logs as
the principal source of information
IMPORTANT IN FORMATION EVALUATION

 To design an evaluation program for estimating recoverable hydrocarbons, it is


necessary to first consider past experience, theories, and supplementary geological
and geophysical data to establish the specific set of empirical relations, which when
solved will provide recoverable hydrocarbon volume, N.
 Second, enough measurements must be combined to solve these relations with
satisfactory accuracy at minimum cost. To minimize costs the program ideally should.
I. Use wireline logs as basic tools where possible
2. Supplement with "mud logs" (cuttings samples and possibly borehole fluid logs)
3. Use cores for calibration of logs and for other geologic data
4. Use productivity tests to obtain Rw and assist-in evaluating important borderline
cases that cannot be satisfactorily resolved from the above
MUD RESISTIVITY

 It is important to know mud resistivity, Rm, since it completes the circuit between the
logging tool and the formation
 We can classify borehole muds into two groups, those that are conductive and those
that are non-conductive. The non-conductive muds include air, gas, and oil-base
fluids having infinite resistivity. When logging in this fluid type, it is necessary to use
a logging tool that does not depend upon borehole conductance, such as the induction,
acoustic, or radioactive type logging devices.
 Mud conductivity is effected by?
MUD RESISTIVITY

 The usual approach, however, is.to assume that


the mud acts as a sodium chloride solution and to
use the sodium chloride resistivity chart to
determine Resistivity at other temperatures.
 Temperatures recorded during well logging
operations are usually the bottomhole
temperature, Tbh, and the flowline temperature,
Tfl. The borehole temperature at any depth can be
determined using the temperature gradient, g,
usually expressed in °F/lOO'
MUD INVASION PROFILE
COMMON TERMINOLOGY
 Borehole

 Rm : Borehole mud resistivity

 Rmc : Mudcake resistivity

 Invaded zone

 Rmf : Mud filtrate resistivity

 Rxo : Invaded zone resistivity

 Sxo : Invaded zone water saturation

 Uninvaded zone

 Rw : Interstitial water resistivity

 Rt : Uninvaded zone resistivity

 Sw : Uninvaded zone water saturation


 The first zone nearest the borehole is that of the mud cake, which has moderate resistivity.
This cake consists of highly compacted solids generally having very low permeability (10-3
millidarcies) and a thickness generally between 1/3 to 3/4 in.
 The second zone, the flushed zone, contains mud filtrate and, if an oil sand, will also contain
residual oil. The filtrate saturation in this zone is usually referred to as Sxo. where: Sxo = 1 -
So, if oil-bearing or Sxo = 1- Sgr, if gas-bearing.
 The third zone is a transition zone saturated with a mixture of mud filtrate and formation
fluids.
 The final zone is the undisturbed zone, which has true formation resistivity, Rt.
 Since depth of invasion varies, it is difficult to assign specific values for the width of the
flushed and invaded zones, but it can generally be stated that the flushed zone, even in very
porous formations, will penetrate from three to four inches.
MEASUREMENTS OF RMF AND RMC
CALCULATION OF RMF AND RMC
 Usually Rmf and Rmc are measured at only
one temperature
 Many times, actual measurements of Rmf and
Rmc are not available, and empirical
approaches must be used to provide
approximate values.
 One approach uses correlations such as
presented in Figure 1·10. based on data
obtained by Overton and Lipson.
 Desperation approach when neither of the
first two methods can be used is the "rule of
thumb" method. Typical relationships were
presented by Johnson are Rmf=O.88*Rm, and
Rmc=1.11*Rm.
RESISTIVITY PROFILE
 Resistivity-Saturation Relation

Rt  Rw
Water

Hy dro c arb o n s Rt  1 / Sw
W at er

Matrix
Rt  1/ F
Water

Matrix Rw
Rt 
Hydrocarbons
Sw F
Water

a Rw
Rt = n m
Sw F
DIAMETER OF THE INVADED ZONE
Factors affecting the diameter of the invaded zone include:
 ( I) type of mud,
 (2) differential pressure between mud and formation. Differential pressure between the
hydrostatic pressure of the mud column and formation fluid pressure, is highly important
since it is related to the amount of filtrate injected into the formation. A reasonable value for
this differential pressure is 100 psi
 (3) formation permeability. It is related to the time it takes the filtrate to move a certain
distance into the formation.
 (4) Formation porosity, is the deciding factor in the depth of invasion. The greater the pore
volume per foot of depth from the borehole, the greater the storage capacity of the rock. Thus,
greater porosity provides greater storage capacity with distance from the borehole and,
therefore, a shallower invaded zone
DIAMETER OF THE INVADED ZONE

Factors affecting the diameter of the invaded zone include:


 (5) drilling process and exposure time,

 and (6) gravity segregation. This gravity segregation (normally the


lighter filtrate rises) definitely alters the invaded zone shape with
time, If filtration stops completely, all the filtrate eventually will
gather along the upper boundary
TUGAS-1

 Hal-hal apa sajakah yang menyebabkan suatu formasi mengalami abnormal pressure atau subnormal pressure
NORMAL PRESSURE
SUBNORMAL PRESSURE

Fault Outcropping Aquifer


SUBNORMAL PRESSURE

Production Activity
ABNORMAL PRESSURE

Gas Sand

= 605 – 15
  
= 590 psig
Outcropping Aquifer
ABNORMAL PRESSURE

Salt Deposition
Fault
ABNORMAL PRESSURE

Man Made

You might also like